Best years for the R129 and other questions

[frosty]

Now that I've been bitten by the SL bug, I've been entertaining the idea of owning one--not anytime soon though, but at least the dream is actually realistic from a purchasing standpoint.

I've always liked the R129, and if I were to get one I'll gor for the 300SL or SL320 rather than the 8-cylinder models. My budget would probably limit my model year to 1994, '95 or later if I I'm lucky. I prefer at least a '94, as I understand there were some minor cosmetic changes, and I believe that's when M-B redid their nomenclature, so that would be the first year of the SL320. What were some of these changes? I know the last years of the R129 the changes were slightly noticeable; for one, the lower wide-body side moldings look a lot sleeker and more blended in with the body of the car.

From an ownership standpoint, is the R129 affordable to own? Or is this a silly question because the answer is obviously a NO? If I can do my own oil changes, that would be a plus to justify my purchasing decision. Eh, I'm talking as if I can buy one now. If I'm really irresponsible and foolish, I can dump some money and buy an early model one (seems the avg price for early 90s is in the 10k range). Funny, I see a lot of 500 models, and they seem quite affordable, relatively speaking. Must be the gas crunch. That's the thing, I don't want a 500SL even though they are top of the line and probably worth more. Ah, I'll wait, do my research, access my finances, have a reality check before I commit. This waiting is a plus since prices might or will drop. Any pointers on what to buy and what to look for is WELCOMED!

Btw, I've noticed that the R107 (?) seems to hold their value here in California. They still command a pretty good price considering their years.

[iwrock]

Originally Posted by frosty

Now that I've been bitten by the SL bug, I've been entertaining the idea of owning one--not anytime soon though, but at least the dream is actually realistic from a purchasing standpoint.

I've always liked the R129, and if I were to get one I'll gor for the 300SL or SL320 rather than the 8-cylinder models. My budget would probably limit my model year to 1994, '95 or later if I I'm lucky. I prefer at least a '94, as I understand there were some minor cosmetic changes, and I believe that's when M-B redid their nomenclature, so that would be the first year of the SL320. What were some of these changes? I know the last years of the R129 the changes were slightly noticeable; for one, the lower wide-body side moldings look a lot sleeker and more blended in with the body of the car.

From an ownership standpoint, is the R129 affordable to own? Or is this a silly question because the answer is obviously a NO? If I can do my own oil changes, that would be a plus to justify my purchasing decision. Eh, I'm talking as if I can buy one now. If I'm really irresponsible and foolish, I can dump some money and buy an early model one (seems the avg price for early 90s is in the 10k range). Funny, I see a lot of 500 models, and they seem quite affordable, relatively speaking. Must be the gas crunch. That's the thing, I don't want a 500SL even though they are top of the line and probably worth more. Ah, I'll wait, do my research, access my finances, have a reality check before I commit. This waiting is a plus since prices might or will drop. Any pointers on what to buy and what to look for is WELCOMED!

Btw, I've noticed that the R107 (?) seems to hold their value here in California. They still command a pretty good price considering their years.

Many say the the 96-97s are the best years. I like the 96, as its got the old world build quality, with the styling updates. They also had a some interior updates on the 129 in like 96. They changed the door panels, and they also redid the seat design a bit. The perforated leather is standard in the later models.


The R129 is bulletproof. Its a Shortened W124 chassis, and the M104 has proven itself to be a good motor in other cars. We have a 1996 SL600, and its been fairly good to us since getting the problems with the hydropneumatic suspension worked out. You dont have to worry about that on the 500s or the 300s.

If you can do a fair amount of maintenance on it, it shouldn't cost more than say an E320.

When shopping for the 129s, make sure that the top is in good shape, and that it functions smooth. Look for fluid in the brow at the top of the windscreen, as at this age, the small lock cylinders tend to go bad. Its a super easy fix, and takes like an hour per side. (Including drinking beer. )


Also, if you are looking at the earlier models, pre 95, look for rust on the bottoms of the doors. The early ones didnt have drains, and water likes to get caught in the doors, leading to some rust.

Listen to the stereo as well... The water in the doors likes to waterlog the speakers, and eventually blow them out.... If this happens, you can get them reconed inexpensively ($40 for the pair last time I had it done), but avoid the dealer... They want like $300 a side for speakers.


There is a few more things, but they are more things to look out for on the 600s.

[deanyel]

If you do your own work they can be downright inexpensive to own. A 94 SL320 would be a nice choice - the first year of the 3.2 104 motor and the only 3.2 without standard traction control, although the ETS system standard in 95 seems to be less troublesome than ASR. The only way to avoid standard ASR on the 500s is the 1990 to 1992 CIS cars.

I think what remains strong on the 107 market is just asking prices, not selling prices. Owners are very proud of their cars but buyers are few and far between. I think it's a market characterized by a very wide buy-sell gap and very little turnover.

[Dee8go]

A 129 is my next acquisition! I was thinking of something between a '96 and a '99.

[iwrock]

The difference between the 6 and 8 cylinder cars in terms of fuel mileage is small.... I would go for the 500 over the 300, as its got more power, and will return almost the same fuel mileage.

[iwrock]

Originally Posted by Dee8go

A 129 is my next acquisition! I was thinking of something between a '96 and a '99.

If your in Sacramento, give me a holler. You can drive my 600.

[speace]

Originally Posted by deanyel

The only way to avoid standard ASR on the 500s is the 1990 to 1992 CIS cars.

Help me here... My 92 is a CIS engine with ASR. While my ASR is fine now, I have been through several significant problems.

I thought the 90 129 was the only model without ASR, and the 91 and 92 models were ASR & CIS and the 93 models went to Electronic Fuel Injection and a different ASR system. (Sorry, I don't know the term MB calls the EFI...)

[deanyel]

Key word was "standard", but you're right about 92, ASR was standard beginning that year, according to MBUSA site, optional before that. Then 1993 was the first year of LH engine management, which ran through 95, followed by ME in 1996.

[speace]

Originally Posted by deanyel

Key word was "standard", but you're right about 92, ASR was standard beginning that year, according to MBUSA site, optional before that. Then 1993 was the first year of LH engine management, which ran through 95, followed by ME in 1996.

Yes, LH was the term I couldn't think of, but called it EFI for lack of the proper term...

So, ASR was OPTONAL in 91... Interesting. I knew that the ASR service literature I have said it was for the new 91 model...

Now, first gear start is a good feature to look for when selecting an R129. What year did that feature come on board? I sure wish my 92 had it...

I guess, if I were selecting another R129, I would lean towards a 96 model or newer.

[Pete Geither]

First gear start is optional in my SL just by pulling the gearshift lever into 1st gear,,,, no big deal. The attraction of the 96 and later models is the 5 speed tranny. I would like to have one, but the real world difference is probably minimal.

[plink49]

I had mentioned to my (factory trained in Germany) mechanic that I thought that '96 was an excellent year for MB cars and he said he believed it was second only to '86. I'm sure there is a lot of thought to the contrary, but I have a lot of good experience with those two vintages. Certainly anything during the Chrysler debaucle (post '97) has to be, at the very least, suspect. I'm not exactly sure when the M104 engine was introduced, but I do know that by '96 most of the bugs had been worked out (head gasket leaks are one exception) and it is a real work horse just like the M103. I can tell you for a fact that on my '92 S-class, the ASR was a nightmare, but I can't confirm if that was a definite problem with the R129 as well. If I had to choose between a '94, '95, or '96 SL320 (which I did!) I would have to go with the '96 if everything else were equal. The door configuation is much more attractive as to the speakers and wood application which was brought about by the very important addition of the side air bags on the '96. I'm torn as to the hvac control panel. I do like the full lcd model that became standard on the '97 (which I have on my C220), but they have been known to be very prone to lcd display issues, which I can attest to. The doors also have the more desirable lock buttons rather than the little paddles...just a nit-picky thing. Also, I "think" that the 12-hole wheels with the polished lip came out in '96 as opposed to the 8-hole which were very attractive, but beginning to look dated. According to my mechanic, after a specific serial number in '96 the soft top comtroller was changed to a new model which was more dependable. Gas prices should not be a determining factor in owing a car such as an SL, but it is comforting to know that with the 320 you have the one with the best possible mileage, but on the other hand, with the top down on a beautiful summer day gas mileage is the least of your thoughts! I'll be anxious to see what you eventually choose.

[deanyel]

Originally Posted by Pete Geither

First gear start is optional in my SL just by pulling the gearshift lever into 1st gear,,,, no big deal. The attraction of the 96 and later models is the 5 speed tranny. I would like to have one, but the real world difference is probably minimal.

The sixes always had a five speed transmission and got the 722.6 5 speed in 1997. The V8s went from 4 speed to the .6 in 1996. To me if you are at all concerned about maintenance cost, and the starter of the thread seems to be, you stay away from a .6, especially an early one.

[frosty]

Wow, some excellent info and tips!

Yeah, I'd really like to get a later year, and hearing that '96 is the "cut-off" year, so to speak, maybe I should save a few shiny pennies more for at least a '96 model. What I don't want to do is be cheap or think that I'm getting a good deal for an early model which may have a higher ownership cost. I'm willing to wait, and I think that's my strong point in buying a used car. The waiting for the right one and saving up is all part of the plan (but for the most part it's a necessity). When I'm ready to buy and the car still evokes passion, and not only that, if I know that it will still evoke passion after five years of ownership, I know it's worth buying. Waiting also allows for the price to drop! In another thread, someone said that in LA you have people thinking that a car past a certain age is considered outdated or old, so they get rid of it. If they're rich, they may sell the car for cheap so that they can buy the next newer car model. That's FINE with me! If I like a particular model style, I don't care how old it is. Heck, I still love the way my 190E looks even though I know it's dated and my car snob friends have said that it's over ten years old! A few years back one of them was bagging on me about my 190E because it was old and that I should get a newer model or something. At a certain point I gave up trying to explain to him that I didn't care if it was old or not. He completely missed the point of why some people like us have certain cars, buy certain cars, and like certain cars. I still also love the W124, which was what I would have preferred had I more money to spend then, and, yes, I would buy one now if I could. I already have two cars, the other being a Volvo 240 wagon. I think it's time for a two-seater and one that says "I have arrived" even though I really haven't, hehe. But that's besides the point of why I want an R129. It's all about German engineering and appreciating old world craftsmanship. It's a M-B that I've always liked from a styling standpoint. If it gets the ladies, then that's just the perks of owning one Then again, if a girl likes me for what I drive, then she's suspect.

Anyway, been looking at CL (Los Angeles and Orange County) and most R129I've seen are the 500 models. Not many 6 cylinders. Weird thing is that I've seen a '91 500 going for a bit under $8k while a 300SL of the same vintage is going for at least in the mid to high $10k! Mileage and condition being stated as excellent or around there.

Btw, it looks like the early SL has the American headlights, sorta like the ones you see on US-spec W124 where there isn't a smooth piece of glass but rather a rectangular headlight separated from the fogs. What year did the SL get euro-style headlights?

[rfpmoxie]

Hello, and I hope you find a nice car for a good price. I've owned my '90 300sl for almost 4 years and have only driven it ~ 10K miles as it "only comes out" Spring to the 1st snowfall and if no rain is in the forecast. Surely, not my daily driver. Depending on the type of driving, I get 21 - 25 mpg. Changing the oil is a snap with a "Top-Sider" and many repairs are easily accomplished with the help of these great folks on these forums. My only negative thoughts are that the soft top is rather problematic and certain years have a main harness that will deteriorate and require expensive replacement. Additionally, using a battery tender is a wise investment! Best of luck.

Ron

[bobterry99]

Arguably the best years for the R129 are '90-'92 and '99-'02. Years '93-'95 have problems with disintegrating wiring harnesses, and '96 has problems with the transmission that was new that year (exception: SL320). These problems diminished in the following years and were well-sorted by MY1999.